RES701 – Reading an Academic Article

Reading exercise for;
Current Benefits and Future Directions of NFC Service

Did the abstract tell you the three things I said it should? If not, what did it tell you?

The abstract for this paper tries to follow the three rules, but I feel it is lacking somewhat on the third rule. It follows the first rule by stating at the start what technology is that the paper is studying. I think that they have done a good job of explaining NFC in a short sentence. The second rule is explained further down in the abstract. I think this sentence “In this paper we examined existing NFC applications, prototypes and studies from both academia and industry.” needs to be moved up to below the section that explains what the paper is about. The abstract would then make more sense with rule three. This is because they would have discovered that there weren’t many sources published on the uses and that they found their own as well as created more questions.

What seems to be the research question(s) they were trying to answer?

They say in their introduction that they want to research and discover the answer to two questions;

  • What are the benefits of currently developed NFC applications?
  • Which possible applications can be implemented in the future, and what benefits can we expect from them?

It also appears that they wanted to find out the different NFC operating modes and they there benefits and drawbacks. I believe they have done this to better understand the technology themselves and to benefit their answers to the questions above.

What method(s) did they use to answer the question(s)

It appears that they have reviewed about 50 studies or implementations of the technology. From this they have pulled out what NFC operating mode that they used and analysed the benefits of that method in that scenario. This was then used to answer the questions that paper set out to answer but also create new questions. In the second to last paragraph of the introduction they explain their research method. It is mentioned that they communicated with academicians studying Near Field communication to help their research.  They also say that there research shaped the final results of the paper.

How credible do you think the paper is? (hint: look at who authors are and where and when it is published also compare what they were asking with what they did)

The authors of the paper are from a university in Istanbul, Turkey. After looking them up and the other publications that they have written I found that one of them has written a book about the NFC technology. I also noticed that almost all the papers that they had written were about this communication method. They have all had their papers cited numerous times according to Google Scholar. The paper was published at a conference held in 2010. This was when the NFC was still an emerging technology and little was known about it. I do think that this paper is credible and the results found relate to a technology that has little known about it. There is one thing that makes me wonder whether this just started out as a research with no real objective and then turned into a paper. This is due to them saying that there reseach shaped their questions, so I am wondering if the questions were created afterwards to create a paper out of the studies.

Did you agree, or not, with what they wrote in their conclusion? Why?

Yes I do agree with their conclusion for a 2010 paper. There are parts of the conclusion that they have come to that now with more known about the technology may be incorrect. For example this section may be incorrect as new research has found that NFC on mobile phones can be exploited in some cases; “ Also we think that this mode may promote NFC to become an important technology by enabling to store personal private data into mobile phones. By this way, users will not share any private information with third parties; instead they will store that private information in their mobile phones, and authorize people to access it.
I think that the way they have classified the technology into three modes was a correct way to approach the subject and has benefited there results.

Briefly describe two things that you learnt from the paper.

The first thing I found out was how each operating mode worked. I had very little idea that there were three modes and only limited knowledge on how the  communication actually happened. The second thing was how each mode benefited a certain use case. Selecting the correct operating mode when setting out to develop a communication method using NFC will be crucial to its success. Each has its own benefits/drawbacks and they will need to be fully explored before making a decision.

One thought on “RES701 – Reading an Academic Article

  1. well done – a good review. I like that you checked out their credibility and were able to comment on the value of the paper written 5/6 years ago to today’s knowledge. I think this paper may have been setting out not only to answer the questions they posed but also to ‘explore’ the area (especially as it was so new). That could be why they mention the shaping of their research.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s